Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.
To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification



View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 
Rikkitic

Awrrr
18665 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

  #1877198 4-Oct-2017 13:30
Send private message

My point is based on a principle which I believe to be true. It is one you ought to appreciate. The principle is that there is no such thing as a free lunch. Certain things have certain costs, and if they are not paid in one way, they will have to be paid in another.

 

One way is to have lower taxes and to keep more money at home while at the same time neglecting social expenditure that can no longer be afforded. The result is more poverty, more desperation, more deprivation, more crime, general social disintegration. You no longer dare to walk the streets of your neighbourhood. Your children are subjected to attacks at school. Your house gets burgled every week. There are no police because there are no public funds to pay them. Your standard of living declines, even though you do have more money.

 

Another approach is to pay more up front so that these kinds of social costs do not accumulate. There is then no need to build expensive prisons after the damage has been done. Your taxes are higher, but homelessness, extreme poverty, desperation robberies, violence stemming from a sense of hopelessness, frustration and impotence, a general lowering of social standards, all these things are greatly reduced. You pay more one way to avoid paying more the other. This seems to be what the Finnish experience says.

 

Is that true? I don't know. What I do know is that we already have the homelessness, the high prison rate, the deprivation, the robberies and burglaries and other crime. Maybe it is time to try something else.

 

 





Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

 


 




networkn
Networkn
32358 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified
Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #1877225 4-Oct-2017 13:38
Send private message

Rikkitic:

 

My point is based on a principle which I believe to be true. It is one you ought to appreciate. The principle is that there is no such thing as a free lunch. Certain things have certain costs, and if they are not paid in one way, they will have to be paid in another.

 

One way is to have lower taxes and to keep more money at home while at the same time neglecting social expenditure that can no longer be afforded. The result is more poverty, more desperation, more deprivation, more crime, general social disintegration. You no longer dare to walk the streets of your neighbourhood. Your children are subjected to attacks at school. Your house gets burgled every week. There are no police because there are no public funds to pay them. Your standard of living declines, even though you do have more money.

 

Another approach is to pay more up front so that these kinds of social costs do not accumulate. There is then no need to build expensive prisons after the damage has been done. Your taxes are higher, but homelessness, extreme poverty, desperation robberies, violence stemming from a sense of hopelessness, frustration and impotence, a general lowering of social standards, all these things are greatly reduced. You pay more one way to avoid paying more the other. This seems to be what the Finnish experience says.

 

Is that true? I don't know. What I do know is that we already have the homelessness, the high prison rate, the deprivation, the robberies and burglaries and other crime. Maybe it is time to try something else.

 

 

 

 

You have conveniently failed to answer the question I asked, which was, do you think it's reasonable to increase GST by 9% to cater for this? What do you think will happen to the lower income families in NZ once that happens?

 

You have simplified things to the point where everything else that impacts upon that is no longer taken into account. 

 

 


MikeB4
18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified
Trusted

  #1877244 4-Oct-2017 14:19
Send private message

Wiggum:

 

Rikkitic:

 

The issue isn't about cost. It is about what a society is prepared to pay to make a better society.

 

 

And charity begins at home, which means people will rather put money towards the health/well-being of their own family/relatives instead of an increased tax, where government gets to decide on who really needs it, and how to spend it.

 

Personally I think NZ has a much better system than Finland. Plus, us kiwis are a generous bunch, and many of us already give to plenty of charities regardless. Fins are not a very generous bunch.

 

 

 

 

Evidence for this claim ?




Rikkitic

Awrrr
18665 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

  #1877261 4-Oct-2017 14:34
Send private message

networkn:

 

You have conveniently failed to answer the question I asked, which was, do you think it's reasonable to increase GST by 9% to cater for this? What do you think will happen to the lower income families in NZ once that happens?

 

You have simplified things to the point where everything else that impacts upon that is no longer taken into account. 

 

 

I stated a principle I believe in. You can agree with it or not. I wasn't trying to avoid your question, I just don't think it is honest because one cannot reasonably give a straight yes or no answer. There conceivably are circumstances in which a 9% increase might be reasonable and doable. After all, the Finns seem to have done it. There could be measures to spare lower incomes. You present your question as if it is an all or nothing proposition. It wouldn't be.

 

Perhaps I have oversimplified to make a point. So what? I find it perplexing how unwilling people can be even to consider different ways of doing things when the existing ones clearly aren't working well.

 

 





Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

 


 


gulfa
321 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user


  #1877265 4-Oct-2017 14:41
Send private message

Rikkitic 

 

 

Is that true? I don't know. What I do know is that we already have the homelessness, the high prison rate, the deprivation, the robberies and burglaries and other crime. Maybe it is time to try something else.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 I agree we need to try a different approach but I remember years  ago One politician commented that we don't want to cure these problems because if we did we would have thousands of Lawyers courts systems social workers all being made redundant

 

Makes you wonder


gulfa
321 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user


  #1877273 4-Oct-2017 14:52
Send private message

It is also of interest to see when suggestions are made to look at other systems we seem to have a couple of commentators making comments that are always negative. (They know who they are)I think we should be encouraging creative thinkers and look at the suggestions in depth instead of the negative approach of "lets pull this apart".


Wiggum
1199 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user


  #1877808 5-Oct-2017 11:50
Send private message

Rikkitic:

 

I find it perplexing how unwilling people can be even to consider different ways of doing things when the existing ones clearly aren't working well.

 

 

Its simple really. More taxing of our taxpayers can achieve a lot. And yes it will improve a lot (If done right).

 

Is this the only option though? This is where I disagree, i certainly would hate to see us going down the same path as Finland, taxing citizens so hard. And just because I'm unwilling to want to spend more on tax, it does not mean I am unwilling to help, or consider different ways. The only different ways ever offered here however seem to be the ones where the government needs more money from taxpayers. Thats why I'm unwilling to entertain them.


 
 
 

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).
mrfte
83 posts

Master Geek


  #1877883 5-Oct-2017 14:11
Send private message

I personally agree with Gareth on the post-election results when he says that NZders are selfish and I believe that most of us don't even realize it. Which is one of the reasons I don't like labour or the greens - Champagne socialists at their best. 


Wiggum
1199 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user


  #1877889 5-Oct-2017 14:33
Send private message

mrfte:

 

https://yle.fi/uutiset/osasto/news/finns_on_finns_were_hard_working_but_greedy_and_intolerant/7370176 

 

 

Thanks for that, I have always has a similar opinion about the Finns. @MikeB4 ^^^


networkn
Networkn
32358 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified
Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #1877947 5-Oct-2017 15:50
Send private message

gulfa:

 

It is also of interest to see when suggestions are made to look at other systems we seem to have a couple of commentators making comments that are always negative. (They know who they are)I think we should be encouraging creative thinkers and look at the suggestions in depth instead of the negative approach of "lets pull this apart".

 

 

 

 

As opposed to the bull in a China shop, let's not consider all the factors before making a decision "amazing creative types"?

 

You don't need to go into depth to understand why there are major differences between Finland and us. If you don't think 9% increase in GST (or similarly significant tax of some other type) would be required to do the same, then you don't have much of a grip on Economics. The start of any conversation would be to find out how many people would be interested in entertaining such an increase. You are choosing to make accusations because the reality is, if it was an easy problem to fix, everyone would have already done it. 

 

 


networkn
Networkn
32358 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified
Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #1877950 5-Oct-2017 15:53
Send private message

gulfa:

 

Rikkitic 

 

 

Is that true? I don't know. What I do know is that we already have the homelessness, the high prison rate, the deprivation, the robberies and burglaries and other crime. Maybe it is time to try something else.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 I agree we need to try a different approach but I remember years  ago One politician commented that we don't want to cure these problems because if we did we would have thousands of Lawyers courts systems social workers all being made redundant

 

Makes you wonder

 

 

Right, because one persons comments always reflect those of the rest of the nation.

 

Everything in running a country is balance. You either tip the scales to more socialist or more capitalist. There is only so much money in the pot. If you want more money for the poor, you take it from the less poor. 

 

 

 

 


Rikkitic

Awrrr
18665 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

  #1877975 5-Oct-2017 16:34
Send private message

You are right that it is a matter of balance and priorities. I just wonder, in view of our social problems, if we have the balance right. 

 

 





Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

 


 


networkn
Networkn
32358 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified
Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #1878388 6-Oct-2017 11:08
Send private message

Rikkitic:

 

You are right that it is a matter of balance and priorities. I just wonder, in view of our social problems, if we have the balance right. 

 

 

 

 

I don't think it's right now. I don't support a 9% increase in GST to improve it either. I could possibly live with the increase, but the impact on already struggling families would push a greater number under the "poverty line" (for the record I don't believe poverty should be used to describe anyone in NZ, compared with the real definition internationally), which then creates an even greater number of social welfare dependants, and puts an even greater strain on everyone else and a spiral effect occurs. I support action, but not action on a knee jerk poorly thought out solution where all the potential impacts have been ratified properly. I have seen nothing in Labours policy that I think "solves" the issues they profess to care so much about, and the Greens have social policies which are so devoid of financial reasoning to defy belief. (I support a number of "green" Green party policies.

 

 

 

I would support a turn around by National on Tax cuts, if that money went to social policies. Not blindly increasing the amounts handed to people by way of a cash increase, but something meaningful. Something that helped directly, but also worked toward a longer term goal of helping less fortunate families build toward changes that would affect them positively going forward. Teach a man to fish type stuff.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


1 | 2 
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic





News and reviews »

Air New Zealand Starts AI adoption with OpenAI
Posted 24-Jul-2025 16:00


eero Pro 7 Review
Posted 23-Jul-2025 12:07


BeeStation Plus Review
Posted 21-Jul-2025 14:21


eero Unveils New Wi-Fi 7 Products in New Zealand
Posted 21-Jul-2025 00:01


WiZ Introduces HDMI Sync Box and other Light Devices
Posted 20-Jul-2025 17:32


RedShield Enhances DDoS and Bot Attack Protection
Posted 20-Jul-2025 17:26


Seagate Ships 30TB Drives
Posted 17-Jul-2025 11:24


Oclean AirPump A10 Water Flosser Review
Posted 13-Jul-2025 11:05


Samsung Galaxy Z Fold7: Raising the Bar for Smartphones
Posted 10-Jul-2025 02:01


Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 Brings New Edge-To-Edge FlexWindow
Posted 10-Jul-2025 02:01


Epson Launches New AM-C550Z WorkForce Enterprise printer
Posted 9-Jul-2025 18:22


Samsung Releases Smart Monitor M9
Posted 9-Jul-2025 17:46


Nearly Half of Older Kiwis Still Write their Passwords on Paper
Posted 9-Jul-2025 08:42


D-Link 4G+ Cat6 Wi-Fi 6 DWR-933M Mobile Hotspot Review
Posted 1-Jul-2025 11:34


Oppo A5 Series Launches With New Levels of Durability
Posted 30-Jun-2025 10:15









Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.